Hvordan vil dere forberede dere til Vidar Gynnilds besøk og Sadlers artikkel
som problematiserer vurdering og som strekker dere intellektuelt
OPPGAVE:
Hvordan forberede seg for å kunne bidra aktivt i læringsarbeidet? Diskuter, bli enige og fordel forberedelsesarbeidet. Sekvensen starter med korte innlegg fra alle deltakerne - en reaksjon på artikkelen og følges opp med grundige drøftinger rundt sentrale begrep og modeller.
1 Dere leser alle artikkeln Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievment by Royce Sadler.
Mulige begrep som kan ses i forhold til egen praksis:
2 Fidelity (utenforliggende faktorer:hun har hatt det vanskelig hjemme og kan bedre)
3 Achievement vs non-achievement (10% for oppmøte)
4 Transactional credits and debits
5 Continuous and cumulative assessment
6 Shape of attainment path ( læringskurver og tellende underveisvurdering mid-term og end-term)
7 Regulative criteria ( oppmøte, innleveringer vs prestasjon)
8 Formative asssessment
Vi ser også denne artikkelen med referanse til andre begrep:
construct - å måle noe som ikke helt kan måles ved å tilnærme deg begrepet fra flere kanter.
Realbilitet - samme person eller to person får samme resultat.
Validitet - du tester det den er ment å teste
Studentnotater fra lesning av artikkel
ANITA: Pages 1-4 of the article Introduction:
Grades are used to draw conclusions or make decisions. Grades are also used to report performance on specific tasks. The article deals with both these ways of using grades, and is funded on the premise that grades should represent the learner’s attained level of academic achievement, also referred to as “grade integrity”. For this to be realised, it is necessary that the assessment evidence be of a logically legitimate type. This is what is referred to as fidelity, and is the main focus of the article.
Fidelity and academic achievement:
Related to grading, fidelity is the extent to which elements that contribute to a course grade are correctly identified as academic achievement. Reliability (that the same results will be obtained if the test is repeated) and validity (that an assessment must measure what it claims to measure) are well-known aspects when discussing scores and grades, but fidelity does not receive the same attention, neither in research nor in practice. The only exception is within the domain of performance testing, where the correspondence between the real and the artificial situations are referred to as fidelity.
The article continues with discussing and reflecting upon the notion of achievement and considers this to be “the result of an identifiable level of knowledge or skill as determined through evaluating performances on assessment tasks”. Achievements can be graded in terms of level of the accomplishment, or in terms of the degree or quality of the accomplishment.
Achievement as such has an outcome or product orientation, and includes both knowledge and skills. Important aspects of events leading up to achievement are:
- They are open rather than fixed
- They are irrelevant to judgements about acquired levels of attainment (results)
- The working process, speed, conditions and student experiences of learning are irrelevant in the grading process
Possible question for the coming discussions in week 11 (based on pages 1 - 4 in the article):
- Dr. Royce Sadler discusses the understanding of the concept” achievement” in his article, and talks about how achievements can be graded. Can everything we do at school be regarded as achievements, and if not, how do we go through with assessing that?
Achievements versus non-achievements
Transactional credits and debits
Bestowed credtis and debits
Continuous and cumulative assessment
Cumulative assessment and course objectives
Cumulative assessment and the shape of attainment path
Fidelity and formative assessment
Challenges of implementation
Plagiarism and regulative criteria
from the punitive to appraisal
regulative criteria include
length
referencing style
compliant and non-compliant works
grading deals with quality, depth and extent of knowledge or competence
a non-compliant work should be returned and asked to be rectified in order to become compliant (administrative decision, not a qualitative judgement
Personal reflection (Morten):
I agree with the assessment of distinguishing between original work, content and author's own arguments in an essay from regulative criteria, or formal regulations for essay writing. However, I do find it important to highlight the ethical aspect of committing plagiarism, which is far more severe than not being able to comply with referencing style. It is a commendable goal to focus on appraisal rather than punishment, but if such things occur on a frequent basis - how do you then keep on separating ethical breaches from actual original thoughts supported by referenced sources?
Conclusion
transactional and 'bestowed' - awards and penalties
accumulative
fidelity - exactness of what is being graded? following rules and practice, good grammar and sentence structure, original content?
non-achievement variables are being confused with true achievement
clarification of the meaning of achievement
sharp boundries for the object that is to be appraised
Personal reflection (Morten):
The whole article addresses the returning question; What do we grade? Fidelity, as I understand the word, is exactness and the pressing need, as a teacher, to distinguish between the various factors which are at play when you assess and grade. Sadler appears to reinforce the importance and attention to achievement rather than other components which he labels contaminators. In my own practice I realise again and again how complex the act of grading is. As a teacher one strives for exactness and clarity with your students in terms of being specific about grading criteria and thus hopefully be as committed to them when grading. However, other aspects creates confusion and blurs the actual achievement and muddles the reasoning for the grading, which then in turn might unjustly either reward or punish the student.
What is an achievement then? Is it a set attainment level for all students, or should one differentiate? Should background be taken into account? What about motivation and encouragement? What is the purpose of a grade?
I think I have more questions and reflections than actual answers after reading Sadler's article...
p7-9 by Liesbeth:
The chapter about bestowed credits and debits is about taking into account other factors than achievement, when you assess. The components may vary from rewarding risk taking in presentations to showing mercy for computer crashes. The main difference with transactional credits and debits, is that in bestowed credits the student is not aware of these factors' interference with their grade. That means that the student doesn't (ab)use these factors on purpose when he is tested. Neither that, nor the fact that an assessor often means well by doing this, makes it a valid assessment. My reflection:
I believe that for transactional credits/debits we at lower secondary education have a good practice concerning these factors: we give the pupil a remark instead of lowering his grade. Bestowed credits/debits are more difficult to ignore (feelings you have for this pupil, impressions) and I think the assessor sometimes isn't that aware of them either. Isn't this part of our human being? Some of Sadler's examples refer to the assessment of differentiated assignments, like «making a concession on comparative disadvantage, such as limited competance in mathematics or the instruction language». If we cannot grade differentiated assignments slightly different than the original assignment, we put at risk the pupil's motivation!
The chapter about continuous and cumulative assessment weighs the benifits and disadvantages of assessing along the way (underveisvurdering).
Benifits being:
teacher can give more feedback, so better help for pupil
motivates pupil to sudy regularly
teacher can try out multiple test formats, pupil has better chance of being tested in a way he likes. (e.g. Online testing through quizzes)
reduces stress before testing
Disadvantages are:
instead of reducing stress, some might argue that it gives constant pressure
high workload for pupil and teacher
All in all, the outcome is positive: assessing pupils constantly is fairer and facilitates the grading. Naming the process:
In continuous assessment marks are accumulated throughout the curriculum, so it's called cumulative assessment. The word 'continuous' may be misleading, since you don't get grades all the time, but probably periodically.
Fidelity is an issue whenever grades are given, so in cumulative assessment fidelity will have a greater impact. Already in this aragraph, Sadler raises questions about the attainment path: by grading early achievements in cumulative assessment, the final outcome may not be valid. That's why he stresses the importance of objectives and goals in the next paragraph.
Objectives and goals:
Aims/goals are broader like in K06, whereas objectives are the narrowed-down keystones. When the assessor focuses on objectives in cumulative assessment, these grades won't reflect the actual achievement of the goals at the end of the curriculum. He gives a clear example in the chapter about the attainment path.
Hvordan vil dere forberede dere til Vidar Gynnilds besøk og Sadlers artikkel
som problematiserer vurdering og som strekker dere intellektuelt
OPPGAVE:Hvordan forberede seg for å kunne bidra aktivt i læringsarbeidet? Diskuter, bli enige og fordel forberedelsesarbeidet. Sekvensen starter med korte innlegg fra alle deltakerne - en reaksjon på artikkelen og følges opp med grundige drøftinger rundt sentrale begrep og modeller.
1 Dere leser alle artikkeln Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievment by Royce Sadler.
sadler.pdf
- Details
- Download
- 422 KB
Mulige begrep som kan ses i forhold til egen praksis:
2 Fidelity (utenforliggende faktorer:hun har hatt det vanskelig hjemme og kan bedre)
3 Achievement vs non-achievement (10% for oppmøte)
4 Transactional credits and debits
5 Continuous and cumulative assessment
6 Shape of attainment path ( læringskurver og tellende underveisvurdering mid-term og end-term)
7 Regulative criteria ( oppmøte, innleveringer vs prestasjon)
8 Formative asssessment
Vi ser også denne artikkelen med referanse til andre begrep:
construct - å måle noe som ikke helt kan måles ved å tilnærme deg begrepet fra flere kanter.
Realbilitet - samme person eller to person får samme resultat.
Validitet - du tester det den er ment å teste
Studentnotater fra lesning av artikkel
ANITA: Pages 1-4 of the article
Introduction:
Grades are used to draw conclusions or make decisions. Grades are also used to report performance on specific tasks. The article deals with both these ways of using grades, and is funded on the premise that grades should represent the learner’s attained level of academic achievement, also referred to as “grade integrity”. For this to be realised, it is necessary that the assessment evidence be of a logically legitimate type. This is what is referred to as fidelity, and is the main focus of the article.
Fidelity and academic achievement:
Related to grading, fidelity is the extent to which elements that contribute to a course grade are correctly identified as academic achievement. Reliability (that the same results will be obtained if the test is repeated) and validity (that an assessment must measure what it claims to measure) are well-known aspects when discussing scores and grades, but fidelity does not receive the same attention, neither in research nor in practice. The only exception is within the domain of performance testing, where the correspondence between the real and the artificial situations are referred to as fidelity.
The article continues with discussing and reflecting upon the notion of achievement and considers this to be “the result of an identifiable level of knowledge or skill as determined through evaluating performances on assessment tasks”. Achievements can be graded in terms of level of the accomplishment, or in terms of the degree or quality of the accomplishment.
Achievement as such has an outcome or product orientation, and includes both knowledge and skills. Important aspects of events leading up to achievement are:
- They are open rather than fixed
- They are irrelevant to judgements about acquired levels of attainment (results)
- The working process, speed, conditions and student experiences of learning are irrelevant in the grading process
Possible question for the coming discussions in week 11 (based on pages 1 - 4 in the article):
- Dr. Royce Sadler discusses the understanding of the concept” achievement” in his article, and talks about how achievements can be graded. Can everything we do at school be regarded as achievements, and if not, how do we go through with assessing that?
Achievements versus non-achievements
Transactional credits and debits
Bestowed credtis and debits
Continuous and cumulative assessment
Cumulative assessment and course objectives
Cumulative assessment and the shape of attainment path
Fidelity and formative assessment
Challenges of implementation
Plagiarism and regulative criteria
Personal reflection (Morten):
I agree with the assessment of distinguishing between original work, content and author's own arguments in an essay from regulative criteria, or formal regulations for essay writing. However, I do find it important to highlight the ethical aspect of committing plagiarism, which is far more severe than not being able to comply with referencing style. It is a commendable goal to focus on appraisal rather than punishment, but if such things occur on a frequent basis - how do you then keep on separating ethical breaches from actual original thoughts supported by referenced sources?
Conclusion
Personal reflection (Morten):
The whole article addresses the returning question; What do we grade? Fidelity, as I understand the word, is exactness and the pressing need, as a teacher, to distinguish between the various factors which are at play when you assess and grade. Sadler appears to reinforce the importance and attention to achievement rather than other components which he labels contaminators. In my own practice I realise again and again how complex the act of grading is. As a teacher one strives for exactness and clarity with your students in terms of being specific about grading criteria and thus hopefully be as committed to them when grading. However, other aspects creates confusion and blurs the actual achievement and muddles the reasoning for the grading, which then in turn might unjustly either reward or punish the student.
What is an achievement then? Is it a set attainment level for all students, or should one differentiate? Should background be taken into account? What about motivation and encouragement? What is the purpose of a grade?
I think I have more questions and reflections than actual answers after reading Sadler's article...
p7-9 by Liesbeth:
The chapter about bestowed credits and debits is about taking into account other factors than achievement, when you assess. The components may vary from rewarding risk taking in presentations to showing mercy for computer crashes. The main difference with transactional credits and debits, is that in bestowed credits the student is not aware of these factors' interference with their grade. That means that the student doesn't (ab)use these factors on purpose when he is tested. Neither that, nor the fact that an assessor often means well by doing this, makes it a valid assessment.
My reflection:
I believe that for transactional credits/debits we at lower secondary education have a good practice concerning these factors: we give the pupil a remark instead of lowering his grade. Bestowed credits/debits are more difficult to ignore (feelings you have for this pupil, impressions) and I think the assessor sometimes isn't that aware of them either. Isn't this part of our human being?
Some of Sadler's examples refer to the assessment of differentiated assignments, like «making a concession on comparative disadvantage, such as limited competance in mathematics or the instruction language». If we cannot grade differentiated assignments slightly different than the original assignment, we put at risk the pupil's motivation!
The chapter about continuous and cumulative assessment weighs the benifits and disadvantages of assessing along the way (underveisvurdering).
Benifits being:
- teacher can give more feedback, so better help for pupil
- motivates pupil to sudy regularly
- teacher can try out multiple test formats, pupil has better chance of being tested in a way he likes. (e.g. Online testing through quizzes)
- reduces stress before testing
Disadvantages are:- instead of reducing stress, some might argue that it gives constant pressure
- high workload for pupil and teacher
All in all, the outcome is positive: assessing pupils constantly is fairer and facilitates the grading.Naming the process:
In continuous assessment marks are accumulated throughout the curriculum, so it's called cumulative assessment. The word 'continuous' may be misleading, since you don't get grades all the time, but probably periodically.
Fidelity is an issue whenever grades are given, so in cumulative assessment fidelity will have a greater impact. Already in this aragraph, Sadler raises questions about the attainment path: by grading early achievements in cumulative assessment, the final outcome may not be valid. That's why he stresses the importance of objectives and goals in the next paragraph.
Objectives and goals:
Aims/goals are broader like in K06, whereas objectives are the narrowed-down keystones. When the assessor focuses on objectives in cumulative assessment, these grades won't reflect the actual achievement of the goals at the end of the curriculum. He gives a clear example in the chapter about the attainment path.